plz mods, everybody look!!

**blizzard** · 12-20-2002, 03:46 PM

I've found a book called "stack" from my english friend ,bros.It's published in england and the publishers are persons who settled up the website called"www.biohazard849.com".The fact is,nearly all the cycles are 22-21 days long and the dosages are pretty high as like taking 3000mg per week.Well I need comments on it from the people who has experienced the cycles from the book "stack".Its totally different from our knowledge honestly and It mixed my mind.Can it be right to take pretty high dosages in that short period?

Comments are appreciated mates!!!Thanks from now on......

**dansteelman** · 12-20-2002, 03:52 PM

from what I hear you will lose more gains that way. If you go lower doses for longer periods of time, your body will hold better and decide that the weight you are supposed to stay at is higher because you have been so large for so long. Plus you have higher quality gains over a longer period of time and they are much more likely to stay.

Thats just what I have read and I'm not positive on exactly how accurate it is, but i have never tried that high a dose...but hey, since a book says to do it, I might just try it :/

**symatech** · 12-20-2002, 06:15 PM

Well, imagine you were running test at 3000mg/week. Youd be a walking erection, and when the cycle ended, youd crash so hard I doubt youd ever come back. If it was DECA , well, your results would be the same as above without the erection

id list more but im lazy (you get the idea anyhow)

So i think from a conceptual level at least, running short cycles with extremely high dosages is not a great idea. but this is my .02 and you should by all means explore every possible avenue.

peace

**Rickson** · 12-20-2002, 06:55 PM

This isn't new info and has been around forever although everyone who writes a book tries to claim they invented the fangowango cycle. By the way they don't work well.

**MIKE_XXL** · 12-20-2002, 09:49 PM

Bill Roberts used to advocate those kind of short 2 week cycles, i porsonaly think it would work if the short cycles were repeated. let's say 3 weeks on 2 weeks off and then repeat for about a year, your gains would be good, in the off weeks you could use anti-catabolic agents such as insulin , growth hormone , clen , low dose T-3 (12.5mcg/day) switching back and forth between those would work great...my 0.02 cents...XXL

**nj_** · 12-20-2002, 11:55 PM

Originally posted by MIKE_XXL
Bill Roberts used to advocate those kind of short 2 week cycles, i porsonaly think it would work if the short cycles were repeated. let's say 3 weeks on 2 weeks off and then repeat for about a year, your gains would be good, in the off weeks you could use anti-catabolic agents such as insulin, growth hormone, clen, low dose T-3 (12.5mcg/day) switching back and forth between those would work great...my 0.02 cents...XXL

If you were doing 3 wks on / 2 wks off with slin/gh/etc. in between cycles, it would effectively become a year long cycle with a ton of bridging. I've seen a lot of stuff about the short cycles and I know they do work, I've seen them work, its not something I am too keen on recommending to people to do as their first cycle though because IMO they are more demanding than longer cycles.

**MIKE_XXL** · 12-21-2002, 07:57 AM

Originally posted by nj_

If you were doing 3 wks on / 2 wks off with slin/gh/etc. in between cycles, it would effectively become a year long cycle with a ton of bridging. I've seen a lot of stuff about the short cycles and I know they do work, I've seen them work, its not something I am too keen on recommending to people to do as their first cycle though because IMO they are more demanding than longer cycles.

Yes it would become a year long cycle with a lot of bridging but it still would be better to go about it this way then year a long cycle with Androgens.

XXL